The rapid method of synthesis described here is readily scalable to the proportions required in cosmetics manufacture.

The basic scenario of resistive switching in TiO₂ (Jameson et al., 2007) assumes the formation and electromigration of oxygen vacancies between the electrodes (Baiatu et al., 1990), so that the distribution of concomitant n-type conductivity (Janotti et al., 2010) across the volume can eventually be controlled by an external electric bias, as schematically shown in Figure 1B. Direct observations with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) revealed more complex electroforming processes in TiO₂ thin films. In one of the studies, a continuous Pt filament between the electrodes was observed in a planar Pt/TiO₂/Pt memristor (Jang et al., 2016). As illustrated in Figure 1C, the corresponding switching mechanism was suggested as the formation of a conductive nanofilament with a high concentration of ionized oxygen vacancies and correspondingly reduced Ti³⁺ ions. These ions induce detachment and migration of Pt atoms from the electrode via strong metal–support interactions (Tauster, 1987). Another TEM investigation of a conductive TiO₂ nanofilament revealed it to be a Magnéli phase Ti_nO_2n−1 (Kwon et al., 2010). Supposedly, its formation results from an increase in the concentrations of oxygen vacancies within a local nanoregion above their thermodynamically stable limit. This scenario is schematically shown in Figure 1D. Other hypothesized point defect mechanisms involve a contribution of cation and anion interstitials, although their behavior has been studied more in tantalum oxide (Wedig et al., 2015; Kumar et al., 2016). The plausible origins and mechanisms of memristive switching have been comprehensively reviewed in topical publications devoted to metal oxide memristors (Yang et al., 2008; Waser et al., 2009; Ielmini, 2016) as well as TiO₂ (Jeong et al., 2011; Szot et al., 2011; Acharyya et al., 2014). The resistive switching mechanisms in memristive materials are regularly revisited and updated in the themed review publications (Sun et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020).

The aim of this work was to examine particularly the Degussa P25 titanium dioxide nanoparticles (P25TiO₂NPs) because they are among the most employed ones in cosmetics. In fact, all kinds of titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO₂NPs) have gained widespread commercialization over recent decades. This white pigment (TiO₂NPs) is used in a broad range of applications, including food, personal care products (toothpaste, lotions, sunscreens, face creams), drugs, plastics, ceramics, and paints. The original source is abundant in Earth as a chemically inert amphoteric oxide, which is thermally stable, corrosion-resistant, and water-insoluble. This oxide is found in three different forms: rutile (the most stable and substantial form), brookite (rhombohedral), and anatase (tetragonal as rutile), of these, both rutile and anatase are of significant commercial importance in a wide range of applications [3]. Additionally, the nano-sized oxide exhibits interesting physical properties, one of them is the ability to act as semiconducting material under UV exposure. In fact, TiO₂NPs are the most well-known and useful photocatalytic material, because of their relatively low price and photo-stability [4]. Although, this photoactivity could also cause undesired molecular damage in biological tissues and needs to be urgently assessed, due to their worldwide use. However, not all nanosized titanium dioxide have the same behavior. In 2007, Rampaul A and Parkin I questioned: “whether the anatase/rutile crystal form of titanium dioxide with an organosilane or dimethicone coat, a common titania type identified in sunscreens, is appropriate to use in sunscreen lotions” [5]. They also suggested that with further study, other types of functionalized titanium dioxide could potentially be safer alternatives. Later, Damiani found that the anatase form of TiO₂NPs was the more photoactive one, and stated that it should be avoided for sunscreen formulations, in agreement with Barker and Branch (2008) [6,7].

Following the EU’s ban on E171, the FDA told the Guardian that, based on current evidence, titanium dioxide as a food additive is safe.  “The available safety studies do not demonstrate safety concerns connected to the use of titanium dioxide as a color additive.”